I don't know that would be true. Why do you think they're connected? The "powers that be" might say NC State is tied @ the hip to UNC, but I don't think a private school is "tied" to UNC. Of course Duke is AAU so it isn't out of the realm of possiblity, but I just don't see it. The B1G now wants flagship schools that will bring in the whole state (& between Charlotte and the triangle, that would be a lot of people)

Also, chief rivalry has not been important as far expansion has been concerned recently. Nebraska-Oklahoma, Texas-TAMU, Missouri-Kansas, 'Cuse-UCONN, Pitt-WVU, Rutgers-...OK you got me there, but you get my point.

I don't understand the fascination with UVA. I appreciate that the school has top notch academics, but I'm looking at TV markes. Maryland already gives you Baltimore-DC, which includes the densely populated northern Virginia area, Strictly from the TV market perspective, UVA adds little.

Seems to me that NC and Georgia Tech would be a better fit if TV markets are your overriding goal. The other possibility is that 16 teams is not where it is stopping.

I know it is a long shot, but does anyone here see a school in Florida that the B1G might be able to sway? Florida is an AAU school, but I highly doubt they would ever leave the SEC.

The state og Georgia is Georgia's territory, GT (great academic school) offers little in terms of market or fan base. UVA has been mediocre in terms of athletic results, but it is a good academic school and has a very strong alumni base across the north east. I think with Rutgers, Maryland, PSU, Michigan and UVA the B1G definitely takes control of the Northeast US (yes, people there do pay less attention to collegiate athletics). I am still pissed about ND, f'em

GaTech is a strong academic school as well, and yes, Georgia is definitely the school, probably followed by Alabama/Auburn in the state of Georgia. However, what exactly did Rutgers add in terms of fanbase? Georgia Tech is a strategic location... pretty much the capital of the south. If the move for Rutgers/Maryland made sense to B1G officials, I'd say the move for Georgia Tech makes sense.

which is average, is that basically one school will not get you the NYC market (i.e. Rutgers), but many schools, such as Michigan have large alumni bases there. I know UNC does, and if UVA does as well, it might increase the number of people in the area demanding the BTN. That and lacrosse. Always lacrosse.

You guys are funny. UNC would be foolish to chain themselves to Duke? That makes sense. Their rivalry is equivalent to Michigan and OSU, just in a different sport. Would we all be ok if osu left the Big Ten and we only played them in an OOC game? Didnt think so. UNC will never leave Duke. The ACC just added Lville, Syracuse, ND and Pitt. Do you really think UNC, a true hoops school, would leave that conference? The ACC conference will dominate hoops in years to come and I dont care if all this realignment is fueled by football and money, UNC will stay put. Those schools will help generate enough money for everyone to be happy.

Who said the ACC was suppose to dominate this year? Nobody. The ACC is bringing in Lville and Syracause, which are two great programs. The Big Ten has not been consistently dominant in bball like this year, and they bring in Rutgers and Maryland. I say advantage ACC. Could the Big Ten continue to be this good? Absolutely. But in my opinion, I think the ACC will be the best hoops conf in the years to come. The whole point to this is that UNC will stay put. I dont really care which bball conf dominates, I just dont see UNC ever leaving the ACC.

If Michigan, UVA, and UNC and Georgia Tech joined, the Big Ten would have 5 of the top 10 ranked public undergraduate schools in the country according to US News, the others being William and Mary and some University of California schools.

You have to admit that pulling in a UNC, UVa, or Duke would be an amazing move by those two, though. I'm probably biased being down here in Carolina but it would be great to see any or all of these three in the B1G, if only because of the academics.

Apparently you are NOT taking into account the MOST important factor. Rutger's new football helmets are WAY KOOL. Total win. That alone is worth having them in the conference. If you don't know what I mean, google image them... I'd add a link or pic here but what do I know about fancy computer things.

GT & VT > Maryland and Rutgers, in all regards. Boy, I am sure glad we added those two powers first to get all that "TV money"... if the cable model still exists the next time a Big 10 TV deal is signed.

Jim Delany: "Cable money is much more important than either football relevance or academic prominence."

Although this constant expansion is annoying. I actaully like adding UNC a lot. They're a great academic institution, new area/market, great basketball tradition, they have a football team. Plus it would annoy the hell out of Duke. Which would be entertaining.

I agree. I kind of like the idea of adding UNC, and since the most important thing to me is adding good football programs, I've felt weird about liking that idea.

I think UNC has potential as a football program, and it's one of those programs that probably really would improve if it joined the Big Ten. There's also a good amount of talent in that part of the country, so it'd be nice to open up those recruiting areas a bit.

If the Big Ten expands to 16, my guess is the SEC also expands, and VT is almost assuredly #1 on their list. I think they'd be ok if the two teams are in separate conferences if those two conferences are the most powerful in the country.

I would be worried if we are forced to take schools along with UVA and UNC. I love this move. I would love it if they stayed at 12, but that wasn't going to happen with the SEC expanded to 14. This is a great move by Delaney. Attack and get the schools you want, dont wait and get leftovers from everyone else. I wasnt thrilled by Rutgers, but it was understandable. I would love to take UNC, UVA, GT and maybe Florida, now that they are free from Meyer. Getting different academic programs in different states.

There is no chance that Florida leaves the SEC. NONE! Florida St. on the other hand may soon be available. Howeva, I see FSU, Clemson, ND and other ACC leftovers heading to the Big 12 when it is said and done. If the B1G goes 16, we know UNC, UVA and GT are the options. Beyond that, you would have to look at Syracuse, Duke, and FSU. It helps with the NY market adding Syracuse, Duke maintains one of the greatest CBB rivalries, and FSU brings even more of the south, a great market, and great recruiting. I don't ever see FSU joining the B1G, but it would be nice if 20 is where we are headed. I just don't know if I see that happening, because the PAC 12 would need to add some shitty teams to get to 20.

I don't think it is "should", it would be "could". It's not like it's a great academic institution, the school uses the top 10% rule and is in a state that isn't known for its public school system. Additionally, have you seen the young ladies who go to that school? You don't maintain those tans in the library...

All of the expected rabblers can rabble, but I would be very excited about a 16 team league with UNC and Virginia.

Big Ten would kill it in basketball and academic stuff, great football and bball recruiting, a new lax league, and all four of the new additions are closer to where I live than any 2012 Big Ten league member. Play a 10-game football schedule and it's not so bad.

Adding a new conference sport (hockey) that is borderline revenue/not disagrees. Also one of the main selling points of BTN was the added coverage for non-revenue sports. Wrestling, WBB, gymnastics, etc. have all been on BTN the last few days.

Don't be suprised if lacrosse (before hockey or baseball) becomes the next money making sport. It is a very fast growing sport which is entertaining to watch on TV (and is having rules to make it move even faster and fan friendly)

I agree. It makes for a great live and TV sport to watch. It's fast, has good breaks, has lots of scoring and enough contact/physicality. Not only that, but it's played in a season where college doesn't have another big sport to compete with. I expect lacrosse to be the #3 sport in not too many years.

As someone who lived in NC for close to 20 years and who has a daughter who just graduated from UNC, I would love this. UVA and UNC are culturally very similar to UM, perhaps with the addition of a drawl. Research-wise, tradition-wise and other-wise, makes sense. UNC and Duke could still play each year (same with UNC-NC State), at least in BB, which is what most people down there care about.

Well Texas isn't playing A&M in anything, Kansas isn't playing Missouri, Nebraska isn't playing OKlahoma or Colorado. Colorado said PEACE to the B12. Etc. I'm sure they could, but it's more than just OOC, it's fighting for the conference title. It's other non-rev sports (and lacrosse). If Mich and OSU split up, how would you feel?

There are some great interconference rivalries in college sports. In football UM-ND, USC-ND, Texas-OU pre expansion. How about Kentucky/Louisville in hoops? I'm sure they're more. These games are often more "special" in their own way than conference games.

Swapping out an in conference home-and-home PLUS the likelihood of meeting in the ACC tourney for a hypothetical OOC matchup...... no thanks.

It will end up ruining the rivalry.

I have to think there would be absolute anarchy on both campuses if they split up. I'm betting Duke and UNC are a package deal.... As for the B1G possibly preferring UVA to Duke, I have no idea what UVA brings that Duke doesn't. Let's be honest they're both mediocre football schools. Both have good lacrosse... I don't follow it closely but Duke probably has an edge. Duke is a phenomenal basketball school and has better academics. What does UVA give? A couple extra TV sets in that key Charlottesville market?? Please....

If Duke and UNC are split up I will shit myself. I really just can't see it happening though. If Delaney wants UVA over Duke he is certifiably insane.

I'm actually curious about everyone's feelings about UVA. I don't question their academic standing, but I wonder how they fit with the Big10 athletically. They don't have a good football program and their basketball program seems to be just OK. They look like they excel at stuff like lacrosse, which is fine, but an odd fit for the Big10.

Everyone here seems pretty on board with it, but from both an academic and athletic standpoint, they would seem to be a bit of an odd duck.

Their basketball program was a powerhouse in the 70s and 80s and while football hasn't been elite in some time, they have put a fair number into the NFL in recent years. While I don't think they are ever going to be one of the top football programs in the B1G they open up an important recruiting area to the conference and have enough of an athletic infrastructure that they won't be irrelevant. Academically, UVA is on par with Michigan (as much as I hate to admit it) and raising the conference's level in the non-revenue sports will probably be a good thing for us.

1. We won't have odd number schools. 2 divisions of 8 seems to make sense to a lot of people including me. I'm not sure if I support adding teams, but the B1G won't stop at 14

2. Who's better? UVA is not good in footbal nor basketball, but would GT really be much more of a step up? UVA makes sense in the footprint, has great academics, and could help lacrosse, which I do get the impression the B1G would like to take over as being THE power conference (may seem silly to you, but I think it is more likely than baseball or hockey to ever be profitable for TV, which is all this is really about unfortunately)

3. Selfishly, I would like the B1G to look for teams because 2 more ACC likely leaves U-M & OSU with the former ACC in a division which would seem foriegn to me and many fans. This won't happen because there is no one who is feasible to grab (Oklahoma & OK st....just don't see it happening)

Sad part is now Delaney has a green light to expand however the frick he wants. Whenever we complain that East Pneunonia State University is getting added to the conference, someone will justify it with "at least it's not Rutgers". Sorry if I miss the days of playing Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and NOT freaking UNC. Plus, if division aligmnent is geographical, it could be that Michigan and OSU are the division members from the actual, original Big Ten. Conference identity, anyone?

I thouched on this above as well. This is something people should be considering more. Although I think the idea of UNC is generally a good one if the B1G expands (it's happening), more teams east means U-M is either in opposite divisions as their chief rival, or in the opposite division of the real B1G. So as you said ChopBlock, U-M could be in a division with 2 real Big Ten teams (ok Sparty we'll count you-3) and the opposite division would have 7 of them...goodbye history.

I starting to think that They will add UVA,UNC, Duke,and GT. To much money and politics to leave it at 16 Carolina Congress would torpedo the deal if Duke wasn't added so Delany have to add Duke and GT. Also GT brings the ATL market which is hard to turn down at the end of the day I think the Big Ten will have 18 teams. As for VT and NCST I think they will do the same move and for the same reasons as Texas AM did.

If we bring UNC and Duke, I'd rather poach Kansas and Kansas State. You have the winningest programs in hoops together in one conference and Kansas State gives you a solid football program. Plus you still stay a mainly Midwest league.

There's a key difference between the flagship state school of New Jersey and a smallish private school in North Carolina. Rutgers has a huge alumni base and gives us access to NYC. Duke doesn't give us anything other than a good basketball program.

Duke is the best tv draw of basketball teams, it's essentially the Notre Dame of basketball. It also places in the top 15 of the Director's cup yearly, is a Lacrosse and women's bball power, and has a decent (better than B1G) baseball team, in addition to other sports where it's competitive. It also is top 5 in research dollars, comparable to Mich, and strong in life sciences, where a ton of money is flowing. It's also top 10 in USNWR, and AAU.

You're honestly clueless if you think Duke isn't a no brainer add to the B1G. The presidents would say yes faster than Denard can "Look at him go!".

I thought the table form made it clear it wasn't mine, but here's a link to the OP: http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/a-tv-network-killed-the-big-east-and-its-not-the-one-in-bristol/#comment-159683

This is right on. NC State is the school that would be tied to UNC in the eyes of the legislature. Howeva, if the dominoe's fall, I could really see VT, who is most likely the SEC's top target (along with UNC) and NC State heading to the SEC without much fuss from the NC legislature. The same would be true for VT and UVA as the state gov't would be fine with them both landing in top conferences. This would also be nice for the SEC, as they could move MIZZOU to the SEC West and VT and NC State to the East.

Even with no Gov't pressue to add Duke, it still might make sense. If the goal is to stay at 16, then UNC and GT should be the choices for TV sets and markets. NC and Atlanta are big markets, and this makes sense. If the goal is to go to 20 teams, then we might as well add Duke, along with UVA. If the ACC crumbles like this, that would make Syracuse available as well, so we would just need 1 more to make 20. Would we take a look at Kansas? They would suck as a football addition, but help with b-ball. ND would once again make sense, but I think that ship has sailed for good. There may not be any other good options that are AAU schools and relatively close to the midwest/eastern footprint.

I think if the ACC falls apart, FSU and Clemson will join the Big 12. I also think that ND will have some affiliation with the Big 12 as well. VT and NC State head to the SEC. The B1G would have 16-20 teams, but I don't see every conference getting that big. There isn't enough of a draw. Would the Pac 12 really add Boise St, SDSU, Nevada and BYU to get to 16? Doubtfull, as all it does is water down the conference. Same with the Big 12 and SEC, as there just wouldn't be enough viable candidates to join. Wake Forest isn't going to make anyone happy. Still a long way to go before any of this happens, but if UNC jumps, everyone better find a landing place before the ACC ship goes down.

And you wondered why ADs were considering a 10-game conference schedule. An 8-game schedule is untenable, because you'd play ONE team from the other division each year. Even a 9-game schedule means you'd only see Wisconsin twice in 8 years.

The only positive I can see from this, is it could possibly add to the UM/OSU rivalry. If we're the only teams in our division with any historical connection, we'll bond in our hatred. If we only play Wisconsin/Iowa twice a decade....well you can't really build a hatred out of that.

-- Football: First off, Virginia is pretty fertile recruiting ground, and giving Michigan and OSU extra access to the state is bad news for UVA. Plus, I'm not convinced the state legislature would let UVA go without ensuring VT is taken care of.** Since the B1G won't want VT, "taken care of" means the SEC. Great, so now UVA gets to try and recruit its home state against another home-state program in the SEC and Michigan and OSU (whom we don't win very many battles against, as Curtis Grant, Maurice Hurst, and others would attest to) all as competition. Fun times. UVA, even in a decade that hasn't been the greatest for its football program, has at times controlled its destiny to get to the ACCCG. In other words, contended for ACC titles. UVA will never, ever contend for a Big Ten title. Not ever.

-- Basketball: UVA's primary recruiting chip is spelled A-C-C. I might in a more candid moment admit that UVA could sell itself fairly well in the B1G, but not as well as in the ACC.

-- Baseball: I like our baseball program. In a good year, the Big Ten is a mid-major at best. We have an awesome baseball coach who'll have 30 programs calling him with a lucrative contract offer within an hour of the announcement of UVA moving to the B1G. We currently expect, basically, to get to Omaha most years and we pack the baseball stadium. Moving to the B1G would destroy it.

-- Lacrosse: Maryland has already seen its lacrosse recruiting take a hit from moving to the B1G. Admittedly, though, if UVA, Maryland, and UNC were in the B1G, it'd probably all just even out again. Although again, more access to the East Coast for Michigan and Ohio State means less for UVA.

My main concern, though, is this: in the ACC, UVA is one of the most profitable schools with possibly the healthiest cash flow in the whole conference. So we do pretty well. The B1G offers (theoretically) more money, but when you have $18M and your competition has $12M, why would it make sense to go where you have $25M and your competition has $35M? That sounds like rank stupidity to me. UVA can't compete with the 80-100,000 seat stadiums in the B1G. We have an alumni base and a donor base about a third the size of the average B1G school. I don't even mean Michigan and Ohio and Penn State, I mean Illinois and Wisconsin and Michigan State.

And on a personal level, I despise the idea of throwing away the old matchups for ones against Minnesota and Iowa. And I also despise the idea of Michigan doing the same, for what it's worth, although both of these have been pretty much eroded by now anyway. Also on a personal level, I do not want to deal with a yearly UVA-Michigan game. You see a lot of the comments in this thread that basically brush UVA aside as a competitor. I spent a lot of time on Michigan and UVA boards last year prior to the basketball game patiently explaining to both fanbases why the other team did not suck and I know I could just ignore it but I really don't look forward to that being a yearly thing.

Basically, I do not expect UVA would be competitive in the B1G. Probably not in basketball, certainly not in football, and absolutely, positively not in baseball. We don't have a hockey team so from a UVA perspective I don't give a shit what the B1G offers there, and if we did, that'd get murdered on a nightly basis too.

**It's the generally accepted rule that the legislature wants to tie UVA and VT to the hip, and I believe it 95%. However, the money that UVA gets from the state is pretty token. It's something like 8% of the operating budget, if that. If it really, really came down to it, and the ACC became a smoldering wreck, and the B1G were our lifeboat, and the legislature started making threats, it's possible UVA could tell the legislature where to stick its money. That's farfetched but not totally outside the realm of possibility.

100% agree. You have to remember though, most of this blog isn't going to care about if any school added can be competitive in the B1G. There's not a lot the B1G can offer the top dog ACC schools except more money they don't need.

Oh, I agree. If someone says they want UVA to join the B1G, they're thinking in terms of "what can UVA do for the B1G" not "what does the B1G offer UVA" which is understandable. Although I think of it more as "what would the B1G do to UVA." In one sense it's nice to be wanted, but I just don't see what's in it for UVA and therefore don't like the idea one bit.

THis isn't really a bad thing. Pick up two, say UNC and UVA (I'd rather VT, but that doesn't sound like it's even a thought at the moment). Anyhow, then you've got two nice, easy 8 team divisions that preserve a lot of the old rivalries. My ONLY problem here is that to make a geographic split, M and OSU probably end up in the east, where the only other team with a history is PSU, and whoever else comes along (Indiana?).

HOWEVA, if we go to a 10 game schedule you see everyone in the conference at a maximum of 5 years. Most of them in three. As below:

Well, you can't leave off a division team because NCAA rules say you have to play everyone in the division or else you can't have a championship game. So that's out.

Sorry, but a Big Ten where we play Maryland and Rutgers every year, but a player can play for Michigan and theoretically never play Iowa, Indiana, or a Brown Jug game would not still feel like the Big Ten. Plus a 10-game schedule means never playing a fun OOC game again in all of history.

The larger point really though is that there will always be a very annoying contigent of people who, no matter how big the conference gets, will go "oh man wouldn't it be cool if we added (fill in the blank.)" That's new-toy syndrome.

As I said, it would be a pretty rare player that would miss a cross divisional game entirely, even if you couldn't leave out one divisional opponent. HOWEVA, there are multiple workarounds to this if you really want to get every team playing every other at least two out of five years..

One: Apply for a waiver or request a rule change. The Big12 has already asked the NCAA to change this rule anyway. WIth the growing/shrinking/rapidly changing conferences, they're probably gonna have to do something about it.

Two: Play happy funtime games with each team's division alignments as needed. Just call them Divs 1 and 2, and make it so that the only thing winning them does is gets you to the championship game. No trophies for winning your Division. No banners. So there won't be any divisional pride and nobody will care when you flop them around.

Unless you got creative with the solutions, every player would miss out on at least one conference opponent. The rarity would be that it'd be one specific opponent, but there would always be someone. And like I said, a 10-game conference schedule also means an OOC slate almost completely filled with MAC teams, so I don't consider that a good tradeoff at all.

He knows what bringing that program does for the B1G. Even if Duke has to come along, it's probably worth it. Don't forget that Duke is improving as a football program, even if it's a slow improvement.

Returning to the gloryous days where they occaisionally make a bowl game against a team with an outgoing coach...

All kidding aside my point is this: adding UNC would IMO be the best football addition from these ACC schools and they could be a consistent bowl team. I know a lot (or all) of this is about money and perhaps other sports, but we should try to be adding good, if not great, football teams

I have a vague memory about there being a Big Ten rule that only allowed expansion into states that are contiguous with a current Big Ten state. Anyone else remember this? If true, then that would make UVA joining next pretty likely (or a silent commit). If not true, then my wife's comments about my memory and attention span are true.

Delany was asked at the UMD presser how they went looking for schools to invite. One of the things he said is that they start with schools that have AAU status and are contiguous and expand from there.

My heart was broken when Maryland and Rutgers joined. At this point all I can hope for is Michigan being on the side of the conference with the rest of the original Big Ten teams. If I were a betting man, I don't even see that happening.

UNC and Duke will travel a few hundred miles to Indiana for the B1G hoops tournament. You add those programs and all of a sudden you're able to pack 30,000-50,000 people into Lucas Oil Stadium or another dome.

I wonder if the ultimate goal is to have 20 teams. They might be trying to poach UNC, UVA, and GaTech in order to weaken the ACC. If they all join, that's 17. Then, they go after Syracuse and FSU. That would be the nail in the coffin for the ACC. Notre Dame, seeing the writing on the wall, then joins the conference, knowing that they wouldn't be able to play any good midwest or east coast schools if they don't (because we'll be going to 10 games).

I think they're going for 24 teams. Those 24 will be split into 2 "divisions". Those 12-team "divisions" will be further split into 6-team "groups". Each of the 6-team "groups" will be split into 3-team "sectors". So the scheduling rotation would align and rotate opposing "sectors", 2 "sectors", each from a different "group" and each of the "sectors" which is from a different "group" will be from a different "division". There will be a total of 2 "sectors" in each "Pod". A "Pod" will consist of 3 "sectors" and there will be a total of 4 "Pods". However, each "Pod" will consist of 2 "units" which will play a corresponding "unit" in a different "Pod" to total 9 games against B1G opponents in the conference. Does everyone understand that? I think it makes a lot of sense.

This is what we are heading towards you fools. Does this sound like "fun" to you? Does it make sense? No, goddamnit. It damn well doesn't. And the sad thing is the plan above sounds reasonably feasible and something like it could be proposed.

Everyone looks good next to Rutgers. I don't even care anymore. The war is over- Delaney won. We might have won the battle over those ridiculous division names, but the Big Ten as we knew it is dead. Here's to cheering on Michigan against Ohio, Penn State and whatever east coast teams populate the rest of our division.

Serious question, who does everyone want to join the conference that would actually be a possibility? I mean I think the UNC and UVA is better than MD and Rutgers. Realistically if they are trying to move into a super conference status and they are the first to do so who would people want to see come to the B1G because every time these rumors pop up about half the board dislikes the idea.

I hope you get more upvotes so people have a chance to read what you wrote. It's not like anything you said is wrong; Jim Delany is greedy and that's basically undeniable at this point. Conference expansion is about Jim Delany expanding his power base.

Very true, but unfortunately I think staying at 12 is extremely unlikely. There is too much money at stake and no one wants to be left out. I'm in favor of super conferences if they are going to do a 16 team playoff and weed out the BS games. You can keep the bowl games for those not involved in the playoff and keep some of the bcs games such as the rose bowl for like final four games. The super conferences could be regionally done and would make way more sense and you could just take the top four teams in 4 super conferences. I'm sure there are things I'm missing but it's just my grand idea I suppose.

I can't start a new thread and this is way off topic for this thread but if someone wants to post it, there is a good article on 11W about Michigan Football coaches in year 3. Basically it talks about the progression of the teams in year 3 under new coaches. I thought it was a good read.

not in the midwest turns Delaney down cold. I'm one of those lonely cranks who believes that relative geographical proximity and the associate cultural proximity made college football conferences successful, and that abandoning that principle will ultimately be a bad thing for the sport, regardless of the alleged short-term financial advantages.

I would argue that UVA & UNC actually are culturally similar to U-M in that they are World class Universities that are the flagship for thier (rather large) states. Yes they are in the south and not midwest, but they aren't as dissimilar as you suggest.

I have concerns about non-midwest teams as it would likely push U-M into a division with 2 actual B1G teams to have more east coast teams join. I am less concerned about spreading further geographically.

Said another way though, who would you suggest we add as 15 and 16? Some would say stay at 12, but that simply won't happen. I also think staying at 14 doesn't seem like it'll happen. So who? Oklahoma & Ok St? Unlikely. OU & Kansas? T Boone Pickens would NEVER allow it (and don't think he can't buy a decision in his favor). Don, I ask (not trying to be a dick) what is your solution?

I don't have a solution that has any chance in the real world, since the things I value don't coincide with what Delaney and apparently most other Big Ten fans favor. I don't give a damn about expanding the footprint at all costs, which means I would have much preferred Pitt and Missouri enter the conference than Maryland and Rutgers.

As far as UNC being more similar than I'd think, you're not just bringing a school, you're bringing its fans and therefore its region. My Dad lived in NC for about 15 years, and the idea that North Carolina culturally is remotely similar to the midwest would have made him laugh.

Regardless, I fully expect the conference to go to 16, and I agree that academically UNC and UVA are the best plausible match. There are only so many AAU members that are free to move, and I think GT is completely nuts as a possible addition. I'd argue that Syracuse would make sense geographically as long as we've got PSU, Maryland, and Rutgers, but Syracuse dropped out of the AAU in 2011 due to a dispute over how to count non-Federal research dollars.

As far as UNC being more similar than I'd think, you're not just bringing a school, you're bringing its fans and therefore its region. My Dad lived in NC for about 15 years, and the idea that North Carolina culturally is remotely similar to the midwest would have made him laugh.

Totally, totally agree with this. There's more to being a "good cultural fit" than "hey, we both have good athletics and academics" otherwise Cal-Berkeley or UCLA would fit right in with all these Midwestern schools too.

It goes both ways really. People move a little slower, no one is in a hurry. Its more about what you don't say than what you do say. But Chapel Hill and Ann Arbor are very similar. Both are full of hippies, greeks, geeks, good music and good food. Both have vibrant campus life and strong traditions.

There are plenty of differences though. I'd say Ann Arbor has a much stronger appreciation of the arts than Chapel Hill. It doesn't seem like its worked its way into the fabric of campus like it has in Ann Arbor. Michigan's campus also dwarfs Carolina's.

You get outside Wake/Orange/Durham County and it is the South-and I mean tobacco chewin, dog-huntin, we don't take kindly to strangers comin round these here parts South.

Assuming we are going to 16 at least, UNC makes more sense than any of the schools we've added so far, probably even including Nebraska because of academics and research. UNC adds an entire state's tv market, a top-notch school with a similar profile to Michigan (public ivy, though less out-of-state), and good-to-great sports (Lacrosse and Basketball AND Baseball, with football that is certainly no worse than Purdue, Illinois, etc.).

What will be tough, unfortunately, is for all of the other sports not-football. This will be killer travel if the conference extends from Lincoln to NYC to Chapel Hill (and possibly even Atlanta). Just really hard on the players to have to go on the road so far away. For #16, my money is on GT, because UVA doesn't add any new tv markets even though it is geographically and academically (slightly) better. Fan base aside, Atlanta will show every GT game, and that's a lot of people.

Watch out, that one guy who always brings up lacrosse on here will get mad. Everyone knows U of D doesn't have a team and has no recruiting talent in the area. If they're not a lacrosse power, we don't want them in the B1G.

Late last year, Adam Rittenberg came up with an interesting blog entry on "getting smart" about Big Ten expansion (LINK), and it mentions four points which he considered part of the Big Ten's reasoning.

The one that is interesting, but it does put the notion of adding UNC and UVA in a more interesting light, is population and demographics as a driver, not on-field performance in revenue sports necessarily. I would imagine that the Big Ten would love to expand in the Midwest, but following the population (and a considerable number of its alums and fans) makes much more financial sense. He also mentions AAU membership as a key consideration as well. It's an interesting entry and does help make sense of expanding in a southeasterly direction.

I have to wonder if anyone in the ACC even considering leaving is wondering where the ACC / Maryland lawsuit will go. The judge in North Carolina refused to throw out the suit today, I believe. I have to believe that any school would be hesitant to leave until that is sorted out.

happens in a vacuum. What we are hearing is limited to the Big Ten, but what about the other conferences? What are they doing?

The SEC is also at 14 teams. Are they sitting on their hands? Is it possible that they are courting, say Florida State and Miami? They seem like natural fits for the SEC.

And if FSU and Miami bolt for the SEC (they AINT going the the Big 12, that is an absurd notion), what is the effect on the ACC, and particularly, UNC, UVa, Duke, Wake and VaTech? It would be devastating, to varying degrees depending on school. What is holding Miami and FSU to the ACC? History with the conference and natural rivalries? Got to be kidding.

I hate what is/has been happening to the ACC, but the schools mentioned (UNC, UVa, etc) are stuck between a rock and a hard place, left hoping the FSU and Miami stay put.

How the hell would you like to be put in that position - hoping that Florida State and Miami stay true to the conference? I sure as hell wouldn't hold my breath.

No SEC member wants to add more schools from their home state and they are looking at expanding their footprint too. VT and NCSt are far more likely to end up in the SEC. They would give the SEC a presence in every southern state.

I don't know if having the University of Florida in Gainsville delivers the entire state. FSU in the panhandle and Miami are totally different markets, and much larger than those of the schools you mention.

Didn't we just have a thread discussing fans of MSU or UM not being fans of the other? Why would fans of Florida be interested in Miami or FSU games? Would delivering the Blacksburg market bring more than Miami or Tallahasse (nobody in northern Virginia cares about VaTech)? Really?

Oh, and nobody really cares about NC State down in North Carolina. The Big Ten certainly aren't courting them, are they? Nobody is courting NC State, now or ever in the history of everything. There is a reason.

The BTN is on the standard cable packages statewide in every state they have a team. That's how they make a lot of their money and it's driving them into new states. That's why Pitt was never going to get invited. Dollars to doughnuts the SEC network is going to aim for the same kind of deals. Adding FSU and Miami would boost ratings a bit, but it wouldn't add significantly to their subscriber base. Adding NCSt and VT would. I think the SEC would prefer UNC and UVA, just like the B1G, but VT and NCSt are the obvious second choices. Aside from that, UF would be dead set against adding other Florida schools. USC doesn't want Clemson and UGA doesn't want GT. Those schools would almost certainly vote as a block against adding FSU and MIami.

It was only 3 years ago that the NCAA implemented the rule that spring sports could no longer fly. If the Big Ten continues to add East Coast teams, I would think that the NCAA would have to lift that rule. I know West Virginia and Missouri would appreciate it.

I'm looking at AD (D1, but non-M) paid tags on AD provided baggage as I write this, dated 2/13. For my girlfriends trip to a softball tournament this weekend, they paid for parking at the airport, a certain number of pounds of luggage, airline tickets, food at the airport and transportation from the destination airport to their hotel, and then all of that stuff for the return home as well.

Schools like Michigan do this for every trip over a certain number of hours/miles; she doesn't get to fly as much as Michigan baseball does, and they do travel long distances on buses, but they definitely get plane tickets for their furthest conference games and every tournament.

I can't see UNC going anywhere without Duke. FOr those saying that "it wouldn't be a big deal, just do out of conference games," no. Would you be ok with Michigan and Ohio State being in different conferences? Of course not. No amount of OOC games would make that ok. Michigan-Ohio State is the biggest football rivalry in sports, but the UNC-Duke rivalry is transcendent onto another level. They are 8 miles away. We share the same dry cleaners and apartment complexes. They're private, we're public. The basketball rivalry speaks for itself. It would be a HUGE deal to lose UNC-Duke. They are the yin to our yang.

It would be a huge loss, but isnt that what happen to the ND rivalry? I know its nothing like Michigan vs Ohio or UNC vs Duke, but its still (*was) a pretty big deal... it goes to show you that for the right price schools are willing to kiss tradition bye-bye

UNC and UVA are the crown jewels of the ACC. If they go the league falls apart. People down here seem to be ignoring it, though. Which is probably best as it hasn't been substantiated yet.

My wife and her sister, both UNC alumni, hate the idea of it. More because of Southern pride than anything else I'm afraid - carpetbagging and all of that. Yeah . . . they still take that shit seriously. I always tell them if they had the talent down here then they wouldn't need us yankee's to do it for them. I am not a popular guy at times.

Swofford is a UNC alumnus as well. Living in the triangle you have to be aware of the criticisms the NC State people (and others) have for him - being UNC-centric. Its hard for me to believe UNC isn't being transparent with Swofford. He's too well connected to have an end-run like this upset his empire, even as weakly as it seems to be put together today.